User talk:Erik/Archive 25

Question
Could you check and se that I did this correctly? Thanks.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good! I can't remember if I've done a non-admin closure in the past. If I did, it was quite a while ago. What template did you use for the closure? Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I used the instructions at Articles for deletion/Administrator instructions. While it includes instructions for those with the mop, some of the lessor duties can be done without.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, I revised WP:NF quite a bit (but left the "future films" part alone, obviously). Can you check it out and see the discussion on the talk page as well? Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Will do. And have you an opinion on WP:FFILM?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It ought to be planned films, not future films. If a planned film is to be considered an event, WP:CRYSTAL says, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." Films that have not yet started filming are not "almost certain to take place". That's why I advocate merges—the coverage about plans for a film has its basis in another element, may it be the source material or a well-known director. I do not think it is appropriate to explain exceptions; common sense needs to be applied, and there is a lot of niggling here. Saying something like "trimmed... and then stuffed somewhere else" misunderstands why Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Wikipedia wants articles written with a historical perspective, and articles about fiction should ultimately be about its reception and significance. If we cannot be almost certain that the film will be released, then we should not be placing so much importance on the details of the planning. The start of filming is a tolerable threshold because we are very likely to be able to discuss its reception and significance soon. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 23:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Did the move to Planned Films. Sensible. I included explanations due to how often NFF is mis-construed in discussions to mean never. And I do not disagree with the value of merges, only that some editors might (and some have) remove sourced and cogent content from an article to make a merge easier to consider. It's the decreasing of a readers's understanding of the topic being discussed that makes such trimming sometimes problematical.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Modified a sentence to be less bitey.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
- There are two messags on my talk page, under 'dvdcopy.com' title, thanks ;) Mayhem  Mario  15:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

- There are two messags on my talk page, under 'dvdcopy.com' title, thanks ;) Mayhem  Mario  09:30, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

- There are two messags on my talk page, under 'dvdcopy.com' title, thanks ;) Mayhem  Mario  16:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I know your ingonring me and everything but the Heather Chasen image I wanted, scrap it, the license hasnt changed, you've done enough! Though, a new image of Chasen has come up by the same user, under the licnese of 'Some rights reserved' (yay!), if you could can you follow that one up? its here Thanks! :) Mayhem  Mario  10:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

'''I know your ingonring me and everything but the Heather Chasen image I wanted, scrap it, the license hasnt changed, you've done enough! Though, a new image of Chasen has come up by the same user, under the licnese of 'Some rights reserved' (yay!), if you could can you follow that one up? its here Thanks! :)''' Mayhem  Mario  17:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I've been too touch-and-go, I was out of town for the weekend and am busy this week. Wikipedia's just not high priority right now. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being pushy, :) I juts thought you were ignoring me :( Well anyway conatct me as soon as your not busy! :) Mayhem  Mario  17:11, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Kill Bill
Apologies, I did put it in the wrong section (I usually don't do much in the way of requesting page moves). Rickie-d (talk) 17:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM July 2011 Newsletter
The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:42, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Film Awards
Hey Erik, We talked a while ago about standardizing the list of oscar awards and wanted to let you know that I finally got around to writing something that automatically creates the template using the data from the oscar database website. After I was done coding, however, I found that most awards had already been standardized. I wanted to know if there were any left to be done. The ones I did just to test the code are here. Tim 1357  talk  22:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Film bot request
I created a request for the film bot and he wants to know where the consensus is for some of the bots functions. --Peppage tlk 18:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

inre User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines
You are cordially invited to User:MichaelQSchmidt/Newcomer's guide to guidelines as I feel its going live is imminent and I value additional eyes and input.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Last looks
WP:Schmidt's Primer (shortcut WP:MQSP) Whatcha think before I go live?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like to make one suggestion, if you dont mind. Instead of the default Contents box, how about something a bit more user friendly such as an individual box for each cat, with the sub cats inside it? A few boxes across, a few down? We use something similar elsewhere on Wikipedia, but I cannot remember where. The best semi-example I can find right now is the main page. In the content section, pretend each box (Today's Featured..., In the News, etc) is each cat - and I suspect more than two can fit across (unlike the two across on the main page). I just think it will look a bit less daunting. Otherwise, great job so far... Best, R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 07:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Makes sense, and if you can figure where the best example is/was, I'd appreciate the links.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ooops, sorry about that Erik, I was trying to copy the exact template name from Twinkle, and apparently any click, even to select the text, will make it template the page.
 * To Michael, (sheepishly) ummm... the template I just accidentally dumped (and removed) from Erik's page? . It's right here. It still isn't the one I am thinking of, but it's a good start. If you need help, let me know. Best, R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 00:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I plugged you here. Hope you don't mind. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 00:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

American Beauty (film)
Hello Erik! I'm an italian wikipedian. In these days I'm translating from english to italian American Beauty (film), a fantastic article that I would like to make featured also on it.wiki. However, I have some questions:


 * What is "rain box"? Can you link a web site about that? Or a specific page on Wikipedia?
 * What is "PTA president coif hairstyle"? A particular hairstyle of every PTA president? Or a coif, literally, worn by every president? I'm not able to find anything on the web...
 * Example: in the phrases "Bening recalled women from her youth to inform her performance: I used to babysit constantly. You'd go to church and see how people present themselves on the outside, and then be inside their house and see the difference. Bening and a hair stylist collaborated to create a PTA president coif hairstyle, and Mendes and production designer Naomi Shohan researched mail order catalogs to better establish Carolyn's environment of a spotless suburban manor" there is only a source at the end. And in the article sometime this fact (a single source at the end of a paragraph) returns... For these cases, the source at the end is referred to the whole paragraph or there isn't a specific source?

Thanks for the answers, Whatnwas (talk) 12:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Pleased to hear that you're translating American Beauty! I had to search for a while, but apparently The Century Dictionary and Encyclopedia defines a rain box as "A device in a theater for producing an imitation of the sound of falling rain." Since the definition is not easy to find, you could add a clarifying fragment in parentheses after the term. As for the coif hairstyle, "PTA president" is a kind of tongue-in-cheek phrase. It just means that if you saw the hairstyle, you would probably think "PTA president". I'm not sure how you could reword it; you could just say "presidential" without the quotation marks in place of "PTA president". And finally, for the Bening passage, I'm not sure what you're asking. Some references are woven together. For example, that passage references Entertainment Weekly, then the Lowenstein book, then EW again. One can go back and forth in references to tie information together. Let me know if that helps! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 14:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for these answers! Finally I have understood that damn "rain box" and "PTA president coif" :D For point number 3, you were very clear: since I haven't in my possession that pubblications, I just want to ascertain that every quotation and every specific information haves a source. I will quote you and Steve when I propose American Beauty for FA. Bye! Whatnwas (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, just quote Steve! :) He's really the mastermind behind the article. I only helped with the box office information and provided some suggestions elsewhere. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:21, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:33, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Box office gross formats
I have started using the approach I got from you, with simplifying the box office gross amounts ($117,546,882 → $117.5 million), on many of the articles I keep up. Though I'm having hard time on The Smurfs with keeping that format. Users (mostly IP's) insist on changing it to the long format and one editor started a discussion on the talk page asking why this format is being used when "most" film articles do not. I showed them featured articles and articles you work using that format. Do you think this should be the preferred way to go on all articles, or should it be left up to the main editors of that page? At first I didn't care for it but I now find it just easier to manage, easier to read, and the fact that most reliable sources write it that way anyway.— Mike  Allen   02:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It is true that most film articles don't round the box office figures. I started rounding because I saw someone make the good point that the figures are falsely precise. It's a little unrealistic to say that all the dollars paid to see a movie were counted. In addition, there is not much value to knowing how many thousands or hundreds were made after however many million dollars. You're right, some sources do round too, though they're estimates. (Like Variety will report an estimated $10.5 million or whatever for a film's opening weekend, and it will be updated later, but still, that probably contributed to my thoughts about rounding.) We could start a discussion at WT:FILM about it? I don't necessarily want to push for it on a guidelines level; just hoping that for some upcoming films that readers and novice editors will see the figures and understand the point of the format. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:03, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * On a similar note, what do you think of "Crew" sections like at Contagion (film) or Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (film)? I was inspired by W.E (film) and think it can go a long way toward identifying crew members who typically win awards (e.g., production designer). You saw the discussion at Template talk:Infobox film about that. Since I've added some sections, I've created Penny Rose and Victor J. Zolfo (per WP:ANYBIO and their recognition through awards or nominations). I know that crew members are not as popular as cast members to identify, but I think that it helps to identify their names in film articles for cross-navigation. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe it should just be on articles known to get awards? On the other hand, I believe the production designer is extra important for horror and action films (The PD constructed all the trap devices in the Saw films, but of course films like Saw do not receive mainstream awards, lol).  The only one I wouldn't include is the Casting agent. Under the Crew section, couldn't prose be added under individual names, or should that remain in the Production section?


 * On a kind of different note and while I'm here.. I found a CinemaScore score here, but they say that "Saw II garnered a moderate 87% favorable grade from moviegoers" is it okay to say that is a "B"? — Mike   Allen   01:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with you on "Casting" and decided to drop it from Contagion. I haven't included that one in a couple other articles' "Crew" sections. I think that the sections help provide navigation to key figures behind the film even if they may not have won an award for it or may not be explicitly mentioned in coverage. For example, at 47 Ronin (film), we can see that Jan Roelfs is the production designer and what his credentials are. I think too many articles are one-way streets, where someone has to win an award for a given film for a reader to finally look at the person's background. I'm still thinking of ways to fine-tune the presentation, for example making a collapsible table that could just fall under the "Production" section.
 * As for CinemaScore, that is an odd score... I've never seen percents associated with CinemaScore, only letter grades. I would not use it and would try to see if a letter grade is provided elsewhere. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 13:57, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought maybe that's how they were calculated in 2005. But their Wikipedia article has no mention of that. :( — Mike  Allen   04:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Filming has begun.
Filming has begun. See this source. 

Can I put the article back please?The Editor 155 (talk) 15:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure! Thanks for the reference. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I put the incubated article up instead of my own version of the article, so can you please remove the tag on the article?


 * We need to preserve page history wherever possible. If you look here, there is very little page history. We are basically bringing the page history here over to the mainspace. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

TCM FAC
Hi, Erik. I was wondering if you could have a look over at The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and its current FAC. I'd quite appreciate it, it seems very close to passing. Thanks, -- Tærkast (Discuss) 09:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 08:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Film
done  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  18:30, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply
I'm not sure why as a third party this private matter is of interest to you. Unless, of course, you are not really a third party. It doesn't seem remarkable to me that one person may claim that saying "you have no balls" is acceptable behavior on Wikipedia. It does seems remarkable to me that a second person would believe so, when common sense says that obviously it is not. I also note that same use of boldface in both your tendencies. I think perhaps a SPI may be in order. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that OnlyForQuadell has been uncivil, but I also think that you did not need to revert him. All this started with a word and a space being removed. You both keep responding to each other and taking each other's words in the worst way possible. One of you needs to be the better man and walk away because there is nothing left to discuss. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Good-Bye
I think Wikipedia's main problem is its societey, and the dropping user numbers support my view. So I think it's important to not hand the whole thing over to people like Acroterion and Tenebrae, but to resist them. I'm truly sorry that I couldn't explain it better.

Anyway, thanks for your help during the crisis. Have fun! --OnlyForQuadell (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Take care! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 20:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Busy?
If your free, the license isn't the same as the others---http://www.flickr.com/photos/markb37uk/3919614923/ Mayhem  Mario  14:57, 2 September 2011 (UTC) THANK YOU!


 * Hey, Mario. It looks like the Creative Commons license is not quite the right one. It is Attribution-NonCommercial. According to this, "Creative Commons licensed images with Attribution and Attribution-ShareAlike as their license may be used on Wikipedia. Images with any license restricting commercial use or the creation of derivative works may not be used on Wikipedia." Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * so the photo cannot be used :( ANYway... Thanks for the help...!!  Mayhem  Mario  15:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you tried emailing about the other ones you found? I never got a follow-up response from that one Flickr user. :( Might have had a change of mind. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:17, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Film assessment
Since Nehrams2020 seems too busy, and hasn't edited since last Saturday, can you do solve the sole request here and see if Licence to Kill can be upgraded to B-class? (and also just what could be improved before the GA review kicks in) igordebraga ≠ 01:18, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Eureka Media
How about a redirect to the company's filmmaker/founder? The redirect can always be undone if better sources come to us out of Poland.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good idea! I changed it. Just didn't think about how that term could be searched for, lacking disambiguation. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 21:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 23:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

film page with wrong title
hi erik

i was editing the film page for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You%27re_Nobody_till_Somebody_Kills_You when i noticed a major issue.

looks like the wikipedia community got confused between the similar titled song and film.

the title of the film page linked above is wrong. based on film community guidelines, the proper page titles should be as follows. however, i do not know how to edit page titles. can you please help?

You're Nobody (Til Somebody Kills You) (song) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=You%27re_Nobody_(Til_Somebody_Kills_You)_(song)

You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Kills You (film) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=You%27re_Nobody_%27Til_Somebody_Kills_You_(film)

thanks,

Laura

Laura Wallace 15:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurawallace799 (talk • contribs)

Real Steel
Hi, Erik! Nice to be working with you on stuff besides WikiProject Comics (though I guess Thor was WikiProject Film as well). I didn't see that quote, but let me go back in; maybe there was a story jump I didn't see. Give me a sec. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, I see it now. D'uh. The IMAX CEO says, as you note, ""The inclusion of two live-action DreamWorks titles in our 2011 slate enables us to expand the range of content available to Imax theatres and extend our brand deeper into our growing 18-34 audience segment." What he's saying is different from what the Real Steel article seemed to be saying. I read the article as saying that DreamWorks was doing the IMAX format for Real Steel to get the 18- to 34-year-old market that IMAX has. What the CEO is saying is the opposite, that IMAX hopes to use Real Steel and another movie in order to get those movies' 18-to-34 demographic. It seems a little insider trade-storyish to me, but, yeah, if the point could be made clearer, I sure as heck have no objection to it. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Cool. And I've put a note on the article talk page explaining my edit-summary error, in case anyone sees it and wonders. Good working with you. BTW, I saw Real Steel at a press screening last night. It's not bad; maybe a little slow in a couple of spots. Terrific FX. Interestingly, I noticed that the opening credits say, "Based in part on the short story 'Steel' by Richard Matheson." I can't recall offhand seeing an adaptation credit read "based in part" before. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

W.E (film)
That loser sock is back again I'm afraid and I removed that Katie lady's review completely as we had discussed. No point in keeping it. By the way, that sock has targeted you also now over the internet I'm afraid. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 11:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Man, I don't even want to see the film! I wanted to ask you, is there any news on the final title? Secondary sources seem to say "W.E." or even just "WE", and I did not see "W.E" among the samples. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, sources are more or less pointing towards W.E. as the title. And this actually happened after the premiere, so I'm sure the critics must have seen the title as W.E. as opposed to W.E in the article. Just waiting for the poster to hammer the final nail on the coffin. PS, even I have no interest in watching the film. And it won't probably get released in India. — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 12:49, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just one of these articles you wind up keeping updated, huh? :) I feel the same way about Real Steel. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:53, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Question of procedure
Hello Erik. Thanks for your replies at this thread Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film that I started. I am wondering how you would like to proceed. Should we leave it open for a couple of days to see if anyone else has other thoughts? After that would you like to do the work to create the templates? I would be happy if you did that since I have not worked with them I wouldn't want to mess them up. Thanks for your time and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you can create the templates! Just go here and copy the code. Open new tabs with Template:Film East Germany and Template:West Germany and paste the code into each and add "East" and "West". (For the "Cinema of" templates category, write "Germany, East" and "Germany, West" respectively instead of "East Germany" and "West Germany".) I don't think you need to wait any longer; I don't see it as being controversial. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 20:16, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Well I tried it and things seem okay. I will appreciate it if you double check them for me. One other things - is there some standard template or message or project tag (like the ones that go on disambig pages) that goes on the talk page for these? Thanks again for your help and time. MarnetteD | Talk 21:25, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Followup - I found this one and have already added it. If there is anything else plz let me know. MarnetteD | Talk 21:28, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I have just noticed that I missed the need for the word "Film" in the West German template. So I am now creating this Template:Film West Germany. I think that means that we need to delete Template:West Germany. Do you know an admin that will do that for us? MarnetteD | Talk 21:39, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * You can just replace the whole code with db-author, and an admin will delete it in due time. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 21:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Done and done. Thanks for the help - it is always great learning new things here at WikiP and you taught me a couple today. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 00:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Crap, I just realized that the "West Germany" template was my fault. I apologize! :) And glad to be of some help. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 00:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I discovered the oopsie when I was trying to add the new template to an infobox and it came up red. The booboo also helped me learn about how the db-author tag works. Cheers again. MarnetteD | Talk 15:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Question
How long would you say to wait on the article The King's Speech to renominate it? 2? 3? I ask you this because I was thinking that it could be on the Queen's 60th Jubilee, but I guess it could be moved to the king's 120th birthday (December 14, 2015). Anyway, how long do you think it should wait? Thanks. Guy546 ( Talk ) 02:25, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * When is the 60th Jubilee? I think 2-3 years could be adequate; it seems like other Best Picture winners got retrospective analysis by then. If you want to keep tabs on the coverage, just ping me later on, and I can help pore for sources. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The Jubilees in February. Also, thanks for the info. Guy546 ( Talk ) 20:20, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Secondly, would you mind if the article is nominated for A-class then? Thanks. Guy546 ( Talk ) 00:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 09:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Use of a screenshot as a reference
Thanks for cleaning up my edit to The Avengers (2012 film). Also I would like to get your opinion on a topic I started at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 52/Archives/ 40.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk:W.E (film)
See the talk page. The official title is confirmed as W. / E.. This is such a bad title. Erik would you kindly do the moves and the backlog clearings? — <i style="color:blue;">Legolas</i> ( talk 2 me ) 11:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree; more symbols than letters! I am wondering, wouldn't reviews have mentioned that formatting if they saw the film? Surely it was shown onscreen at some point. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:14, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Category:Films directed by Terry Gilliam
Do you know why the Terry Gilliam article is categorized in Category:Films directed by Terry Gilliam? I went to remove it, but it seems it cannot be removed, which is to say, if you open the ext. links section, and scroll down to the categories, this category does not appear on the list. Are articles about directors usually categorized in their "film directed by" categories? This truly makes no sense to me. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 03:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's the director template. The code categorizes the article in which the template is placed, as seen here. The director template does not belong anyway, since the filmography is already listed more fully, so I removed it. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 03:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you for that information, of which I was not aware. Thanks, also, for your speedy action and reply.  Cheers! ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive  04:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK question
Could you please stop by at Template:Did you know nominations/John Collee and see about inserting a footnote where appropriate for supporting the hook? Note that online sources such as this page list a different set of countries where he worked as a doctor. Thanks. --Orlady (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

FAR of Richard III film
Hi Erik - I just wanted to let you know that I have removed your nomination of the 1955 Richard III film from the FAR page. There is a requirement in place that a talk page notification of work needed be made before the nomination is initiated. Because this didn't happen, I have placed the review on hold and added a new section to the talk page with the work needed notification. If there is no response after at least a week, the review can progress. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, Dana. I didn't realize that a talk page notification was compulsory since WP:FAR does not mention it being required. There are no editors active with the article, and the problems with the article are far too severe for any kind of patching-up. If we need to wait a week, that is fine. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

opinion on tables
Do you have an opinion on this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers? BollyJeff ||  talk  14:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha, you are the number 5 all-time contributor to this page; that's why I messaged you. BollyJeff  ||  talk  15:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Am I!? I never would have thought. Seeing the statistics now, it makes sense... I'm much worse at WikiProject Film, though! :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:15, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM September 2011 Newsletter
The September 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for John Collee
Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Note
I was jumping the gun. :)  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

re: Hello
How is pointing out that one user's edits are almost exclusivly on the talkpages of articles/WikiProjects uncivil?  Lugnuts  (talk) 14:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I don't think the point is off-topic. Strange how you've completly ignored MikeAllen for raising the point in the first place - I don't see you hounding his talkpage.  Lugnuts  (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Those sort of discussions never usually go anywhere anyway. Should we have a here? Should this be a capital W? Should there be an underscore in the template title. Jesus wept.  Lugnuts  (talk) 19:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Then let's go write some articles! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:06, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry mine was not meant as a personal attack, unless of course they take Wikipedia personally. I was really just asking a question.  Put it this way, I'm not the one with a history of "personal attacks and incivility" warnings. ;-)  —<span style="solid;background:#5D8AA8; border-radius: 8px; -moz-border-radius: 8px; font-family: Segoe Print"> Mike   Allen   23:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Coordinators
I was glad to see that the newsletter is still being sent out, and I hope it takes on a new style/layout to give it a new transition. I'm hoping that more active members of the project will be up for stepping in as coordinators to continue to seek out new ideas and goals. I've definitely enjoyed it the last few years, but time is limited and I'm trying to focus on image additions, article writing, and upkeep of articles I've worked on. I'll still jump in on discussions when I can and help out with any projects (drives, collaborations, etc.) as they pop up. I'm happy to see that you're running again, you've done an excellent job of keeping the project moving forward over the last few years (ha, I can say it too!) and if we were to have the active membership of some of the other larger projects, the outputs in article quality would significantly progress further. I'll be around. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * For the image license version, I think we've always been ahead of what Flickr provides. I haven't heard anything indicating that we don't accept the older versions. As Flickr licenses are still at 2.0, you can still upload the image and then manually change the license from 2.5 to 2.0 (as that is what the permission is for). I personally don't use the templates that Commons provides for uploading images, I just copy and paste the template from prior images I've uploaded into the basic upload form. That way you can modify the license to the 2.0 beforehand with no issues. Let me know if that doesn't answer your question. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:57, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

... in film
Hi Erik, Before we start editing the new James Bond in film article by going in the wrong direction, do you have any thoughts as to the differences between what you consider to be the right approach for James Bond in film, as opposed to James Bond (film series)? Cheers - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 14:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that the transition is easier because everyone recognizes that there is not a strict continuity across the films. (Compare to the Superman films, which have had a weird 21st century so far, IMO.) The "Development" section seems to cover good content. I'm not sure if "Video game adaptations" is a necessary section to have. It seems a step removed from the topic and could just be linked to in the "See also" section. As for exploring new sub-topics under this new scope, what about covering Bond's transition to the silver screen? Is he exactly as portrayed in Fleming's books? What traits carried over, what traits were added for the character in the films? Might be good questions to answer, if that's what you're looking for. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 14:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That sounds great - thanks for that. I may be back later for further guidance and nudges, if that's OK! Cheers - SchroCat ( ^  •  @ ) 08:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course! If you need access to any particular article, I have access to a few databases for newspapers and other periodicals. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation
Hi Erik, I hope you're well. My name is Matthew Roth and I'm a Storyteller working on the 2011 fundraiser with the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco. In past years, we've relied on Jimbo to carry the bulk of the fundraising weight and he's done very well helping us hit our yearly funding targets. This year, however, we're broadening the scope and reach of the fundraiser by incorporating more voices and different people on the funding banners and appeals that will start running full-time on November 7th. We're testing new messages and finding some really great results with editors and staff members of the Foundation. You can see the current progress of the tests here. I'm curious if you would want to participate in an interview with me as part of this process? The interviews usually last 60 minutes and involve a number of questions about your personal editing experiences, as well as general questions about Wikipedia and its impact in the world. In case you were curious, yllosubmarine spoke highly of working with you and recommended I write this inquiry. Please let me know your thoughts by emailing mroth (at) wikimedia.org. Thanks! <span style="font-family:linux libertine o, times; font-variant:small-caps">Matthew (WMF) 18:02, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Matthew, I emailed you. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * :) María ( habla  con migo ) 19:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Article barometer
Wow! Cool!

And, yeah, many times I've seen verbatim passages that I've written in Wikipedia appear in mainstream news sources and even, at least twice, in a book. It is so cool to know that we really contributing. Really puts our responsibility in focus, don't it? With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Just to save me opening up another review or nomination yet; do you feel the article's comprehensivenss is suitable now? I could probably wait for that new title to be released, but I genuinely have my doubts over whether it'll contain anything new or simply a retreading of the themes touched on elsewhere. I had sort of hoped the current batch of edits would have been able to include more production information than analysis, really, as analysis doesn't strike me as a weak point in the article. GRAPPLE   X  16:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like you did not find much new content in the Cinema of Michael Man reference? Let me pull the list of references from Film Index International (published by the British Film Institute) since it tends to be more production information. I don't think I had access at the time I commented at the peer review. Have you had the article copy-edited yet? I think in a FAC process that gets going, the prose is pretty closely scrutinized. You may want to review previous FAC processes (of promoted articles) or their preceding peer reviews to see who gave the articles a copy-edit. It helps to get a thorough copy-editing before the FAC process; the expectancy is to have the article pretty much ready when it's nominated as a candidate. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See FII list. I can send you some of these electronically. Let me know if you want me to send what I can. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I had it copy-edited before the first nomination. There's been some expansion since but not a huge deal, though I suppose a second run through the process can't hurt too much. I'll take a look through that list now, thanks. And no, the Cinema of Michael Mann entry for the film was just an analytical essay which highlighted much of what has already been covered - use of colour, mirroring the antagonist and protagonist - as well as a fair amount of deviation from the film completely! GRAPPLE   X  17:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The following article seems like it's exactly what I need. I'm trying to find it in JSTOR now (though it's not looking likely)
 * ZONE, Ray: Wrap shot
 * American Cinematographer (0002-7928) v.82 n.2, February 2001, p.136, English, illus
 * Details of the shooting of MANHUNTER directed by Michael Mann and photographed by Dante Spinotti.
 * Other than that, there's a lot of reviews, and a few works that I've either cited or rejected as not having anything new or of worth in them. But thanks for the help. GRAPPLE   X  17:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

2011 WikiProject Film coordinator election
Voting for WikiProject Film's October 2011 project coordinator election has started. We are aiming to select five coordinators to serve for the next year; please take a moment from editing to vote here by October 29! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:59, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

TheMovieDB.org
Hi, I noticed back in 2008 you had requested that TheMovieDB.org be blacklisted. I wanted to give you a heads up that I was going to request the blacklist entry be removed. There was a single isolated incident with one guy, so I don't think there will be an issue in the future. I agree that links to the site shouldn't be used on movie articles. Instead I would like to use the link for articles on media center software, as most of them use the site as their main source of metadata. (for example, XBMC, Plex, etc) In other words, discussion of the site itself rather than the content it contains.

I was wondering if you had any objections/thoughts about this before I made the request. -- Ned Scott 01:37, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure, I would be fine with removing it from the blacklist. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 13:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

anonymous (street meat)
http://www.shortfilmcorner.com/sfcfilm/filmfiche2.Aspx?id=53539507

Also here and in 24 other festivals:

http://www.sesiff.org/4th/program/en_noncomp.asp?category1=Bloody+Night&keyword=anonymous+%28street+meat%29&x=46&y=17

Thanx, Erik -- Mig (talk) 14:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Joining "la force cinématographique"
Hello, Erik, I am a member of the AFRHC, French association for Historic Research in Cinema, a bunch of Hard-core french speaking cinema historians : we admire people like Rick Altman and richard Abel this one, not the African Law Studies one on WP. I've just created the article I am not that sure about the name as it was asked for creation on the The Filmmaking task force page.

I am about to create a page about Phonoscene in english now that the french wp version is "acceptable" I don't know how to interwiki this !.

Please, introduce me to contributors interested in "before WWI cinema", sound-on-disc and so on. I've good first hand english sources and I'd like to share this work article in english (google book) about phonoscene.

Please help me to integrate this task force. Best Regards--Thomas Louis Jacques (talk) 15:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello, Thomas! Thanks for creating French Society of Cinematographers. Do you know if there are any secondary sources discussing the history of the society? We should make sure it's notable per WP:CORP. As for creating phonoscene, just create the English-language article, and at the very bottom, you can add Phonoscène . In the English-language article, a link to the French-language article will be provided in the left column. As for contributors to recommend, I cannot think of any editors who focus on these areas. The closest I can think of is, who has done some film genre work that particularly encompasses earlier film. You could also try asking the WikiProject Film community at WT:FILM. We won't bite! :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:12, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess you'll find article about the AFC in Cahiers du cinéma. It is also known for the CST (Superior Technical Commission). If I start writing the list of the members the article you'll have a list of the best french cinematographers. for specialists the AFC is known. Thank you for the answers, I've join the french film task force as well --Thomas Louis Jacques (talk) 15:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Thnx for your note
Hello again Erik. I left my input at the discussion that you linked to. I think my edit count at FMJ must be due to my work as a wikignome or my relative longevity here at WikiP - or both. I think that the editor who might be of the most help in getting that article into shape is User:WickerGuy. He is thoroughly versed in Kubrick and is also a dab hand at research. On another note can 25 years have really gone by since the release of FMJ? It feels like it was only a couple years ago since I got in line to see it. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 16:20, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Will contact WickerGuy. :) And yeah, with certain parts of the Internet having nostalgic discussions, I'm constantly realizing it's been x years since so-and-so film was released! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Cogan's Trade
Please refrain from tampering with the Cogan's Trade page. You are angering the filmmakers. Any further tampering and you will be reported. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.108.91 (talk) 06:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You might not remember me but I remember you.
It's been over two years since I left Wikipedia. The reason I left is because I felt like I was mostly causing trouble.

But I've been doing good since then. I have made a lot of videos on YouTube. I make a few minor edits, but nothing major nowadays, and I do it rarely as well.

My YouTube name is now BlazeTheMovieFan.

I hope you have been doing well, my friend. I'm having a lot of fun in theaters. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 19:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow, blast from the past! :) Of course I remember you. Glad to hear that you're doing well and enjoying movies. This has been a slow movie-watching month for me. I've only seen The Way Back. Hoping to see more, but my weekends in the near future are pretty busy. Hope you've seen some good movies! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:08, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, I have learned to not take movies too seriously. Yeah, sure I watch some shitty movies, but I even have fun with movies I hate. Because I know they're just movies and they're for entertainment. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 23:53, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

EGG
See World Series Year. Frietjes (talk) 21:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * I can't take any credit for this. :) It was the rest of you. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 21:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure you can. Infact here's another!

A compliment
Just want to say how much I appreciate the civil and collegial discussion we and others are having at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film, and I think that's largely because you're setting the tone and leading by example. Please accept my thanks and appreciation for that, editor to editor. Because things are being discussed so rationally, I genuinely believe a middle ground will be reached. It's a pleasure to work with you. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers! I do relate to your concerns about overkill, I guess I'm trying to pin down where to draw the line. Kind of like that judge's quote, "I know it['s overkill] when I see it." :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:41, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Sunset Boulevard needs FAR
A talk page notice about a FAR was given to Sunset Boulevard (film) last December. It's ready for a FAR anytime now if you feel like nominating it. Brad (talk) 04:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It certainly had a very brief FAC process! Let me research it like I did for Richard III (1955 film), and I'll probably pursue a FAR after Richard III is demoted. However, Sunset Boulevard does seem a little better than that article. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 11:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I laugh when I see those FACs from years ago. Seems like they were based on the "I like it" principal. It looks like a whole bunch of trivia material was added over the years. If you have some spare time could you comment on some of the other articles at FAR that need a keep or delist vote? It's getting backed up over there; thanks. Brad (talk) 17:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I am qualified to judge articles on subjects other than film. Unless they're just like these old film FAs? Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't have to be a subject expert on the article. Obviously if the basic FA requirements are or aren't being met you can pretty much figure out what those are. Citations etc. Brad (talk) 19:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Biting...
Thanks for the message, and point taken. I can be grumpy in the morning, especially before coffee. Cheers! ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 20:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Huh! But, a sockpuppet of whom?  No information is given on the userpage, as is usually the case. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive  16:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I am really not that curious. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 16:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter
Hi, Erik. If it's okay I'd prefer to continue receiving the full version of WP:FILM's newsletter rather than a link to the page. Regards, Matthewedwards : Chat  02:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Full version is fine by me too, thanks. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 13:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem! Thanks for the responses. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 20:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 16:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

re: Hello
"Have you considered not participating at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film any longer?" Of course not! Hopefully other users see the stupidity and trivial nature of some of these discussions too.  Lugnuts  (talk) 12:08, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "we want it to be okay for stupid questions" - OK, point taken with that comment.  Lugnuts  (talk) 12:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Edge removed!  Lugnuts  (talk) 07:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM October 2011 Newsletter
The October 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I want to go back to Wikipedia myself...
...but I'm worried that I might fuck up again. Any advice? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Being conscious of your actions is a good start! What happened in the past that you'd like to avoid if you did come back? Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 13:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, to but it bluntly, it's being an asshole. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 15:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I can try to offer several maxims I try to follow in my head. The big one is to focus on content. I try my best to focus my comments on the content, even if another editor is being incivil. I also try to rephrase what they want without their tone. Another maxim is not to go back and forth too quickly. If someone responds to you, and the discussion is kind of heated, don't respond right away. Edit elsewhere for a while and respond later, maybe even the next day. Another maxim is the kind that mothers like to say, if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. The flip side of that maxim is that it helps to be complimentary. If you read a good article about a film, you can find the primary contributor and tell him or her that you really liked reading the article. I think editors in general like that kind of positive feedback. If you want to come back to Wikipedia, it may be worthwhile to find a film whose article is not well-developed. You can work on expanding it and ask me questions. That way, you can get into the editing routine and not have to interact a lot at first. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Newsletters
Hello Erik. Firstly, congratulations for being selected as the new project co-ordinator for WikiProject Films. I sincerely hope the best for you.

Regarding the Film newsletters I receive. Since you are now in charge of notifying all Film editors about the newsletter, I suggest you read this. Thank you so much, and I apologize in advance if this creates any inconvenience for you.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 17:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Let me see if you can get the newsletter delivered straight to that sub-page automatically. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you Erik. Btw, perhaps you would like to peer review Ra.One? I was hoping to get an opportunity to ask you about this. Your suggestions are really needed, as Ra.One is currently in theaters (released on October 26) and hence is facing quite a transitional period. Cheers!  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 13:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry About The Vandalism But,
My Computer Was Infected With A Bot Virus When I Vandalized, So... Now I Removed The Bot Virus Shortly After This Horrible Vandal, Later on... I Decided To Leave This Message, So If I Vandalize Again, It Might Be A Bot Or Me Being Drunk Too Much,

Sincerely, ImageGuy2000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImageGuy2000 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, pal.
I'm not officially back yet, but when I do come back I will be a good Wikpedian and not an asshole. Those things are very easy to do if I try. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh and sorry if I sound like an idiot, I am one, but how exactly do I change my username? I want to change it to BlazeTheMovieFan, BlazikenMaster is an Internet name that has been dead for several years at least. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Changing username. :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:57, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you sure this is the right page? All I see on this page is "Don't do this, don't do that". TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Changing username/Simple should do it since your desired username isn't taken. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 20:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I'm officially back, man.
I am going to read the policies again and do my very best to understand them. It isn't going to be easy since they contradict themselves a lot, but I will do anything I can to understand them. If you can help me out understand them and not get confused I'd appreciate that.

So yeah, see you again next time we talk about the articles regarding movies. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! :) Of course, I'm available to answer any questions you may have, especially about policies and guidelines. If you're going to work on film articles, I recommend reading MOS:FILM too. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 13:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

WP:FILM sources
Given your experience with finding/suggesting sources for film articles, can you get me some for The Jungle Book (1967 film) if possible? In particular for the reception section! (even DVD reviews are hard to find...) Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 03:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll put together a list of references today! By the way, you may want to check out User:Erik/Research. I'll be following these kinds of steps to make the list. Beware that it's probably going to be a lot of print sources. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 12:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI, I am too busy today to help. Maybe tonight, but nudge me by tomorrow. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I listed on the film article's talk page key references to use, but there appear to be quite a few more results in Google Scholar and Books Search. The film is often mentioned in passing as part of discussion about Disney films. I recommend checking out the research page I linked above and following the steps, for example searching in Google Books for "jungle book" disney in the date range of 1/1/2011 to 12/31/2011. If you find any academic articles you'd like to access, let me know, and I may be able to pull it. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 00:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

The Princess Bride
It would help alot with your contribution. I believe this article can flourish. RAP (talk) 2:12 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I can help research the topic and provide a list of references on the film article's talk page. Is that what you want? I will not be able to contribute directly since my time is limited and I have other tasks planned. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 00:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be perfect. Thank you. RAP (talk) 0:24 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Coordinator
Hey Erik, I being appointed as one of the project coordinators, took a task to assessing all Indian film related articles. That's fine right? -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! I've wanted to talk to you about utilizing WP:INCINE to see if it can be a place for editors of Indian films to work together. I've been sick lately, so I haven't done much editing -- have a whole list of requests above! We'll definitely talk about initiatives soon. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No prob's. Take care!! -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 19:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you think it's best if I don't do any edits at all...
...and should only stay here to watch out for vandalism and learn more about subjects? I thought it was a good idea to return to Wikipedia, but the fact that I added bullshit to the abraham lincoln article proves that I haven't changed one bit. In fact I've gone worse. I see most of the articles as exaggerated bullshit. And there is no use changing that as it will only make the articles worse.

I don't believe reliable sources tell how it is, in fact I think most of them are lies. So tell me honestly, am I unwelcome back here? If so I can leave again no problem. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 21:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The Abraham Lincoln edit is bothersome. We can't put forth personal knowledge in articles. Per WP:V, the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. This means that whatever we add, it should be backed by sources. It can't be what we "know" to be "true". For Lincoln, we should only be referencing sources like historians' books about him. The article itself seems well-referenced at first glance, so I'm concerned that if you are going to dispute that kind of article, it may be better not to make such challenging edits. I'm not sure why you want to be a reader of Wikipedia articles, though, if you have issues with Wikipedia's coverage of topics? If you want information, you could subscribe to RSS feeds and read journalistic articles. I have several groupings that I like to read, not necessarily film-related. These may be more trustworthy for you. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 22:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, I will tell you my reason. Because I laugh at the idiotic things some people add to articles. That's the only reason why I like watching articles.


 * But other than that, I should stay away from trying to make articles better. Thanks for answering the post in less than an hour, I honestly didn't expect you to answer so quick.


 * Tell me how do I know what website I can trust to read about things like history? To be honest, I don't trust any site whatsoever. Even official websites have their share of lies. So if I want to learn history, I think it's better to go to a library and read books there. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 23:29, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Reading books is definitely the way to go. In a sense, I can relate because I don't read Wikipedia articles about history very closely unless they are featured articles. Not to mention that books can go more in depth. For film, I think I have a better eye for its articles than with other subjects, so I can read one with a certain level of skepticism or trust. Still, I think if you want to be active on Wikipedia, you should have a more positive outlook, like to figure out what content and sources to trust and to improve the same if they are not trustworthy. If you have that kind of condescending perspective (for lack of a better term), it's not going to help Wikipedia. It depends both on what you want and what the encyclopedia needs. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:32, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Captain America: The First Avenger
The issue of the cosmic cube has come up again, your opinion is welcomed.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:30, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hello. Perhaps you had failed to see my last message. I had requested you to peer review the film article Ra.One, as it's nearing completion and needs final inputs to get it the required thrust for GA status. It's very important, as it will join the few Indian film article GAs in Wikipedia. I heard you were unwell. I hope you have recovered. And I also hope you can take some time to see the article. Cheers!  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 14:07, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey! I saw your message. I just had a really busy week after being on the mend. Tried to play catch-up a little yesterday, but still not much time. :) I hope I can look at it this week. Feel free to nudge me again! I don't mind. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:01, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. Thank you for accepting :D.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 18:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I might go back into helping out movie articles...
...but how can I do it without damaging the articles? I have the bad habit of exaggerating everything and take stuff seriously. For example, if I see nothing but negative things in the criticism section of a movie I love I could defend the movie by making an edit "IT'S NOT THAT BAD!!!!!" that's what I did to Bad Boys II back when I was too active.

So yeah, I'm worried that I could damage a movie article rather than helping it. I am aware that I shouldn't take the criticism section seriously as it's not the opinion of movie goers but people who are paid to make the reviews, that's why I choose to watch movie reviews on YouTube instead.

So let me ask, how can I help those movie articles rather than hurting them? BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * One of our ongoing tasks at WP:FILM is to continue to improve the list of articles at WP:FILMCORE. You could easily pick up a stub out of that list and find anything relevant about it online - most of the stubs have no reception section at all, which means you could create one without worrying about offsetting what's already there. Just give some of the better film sites a search to find reviews and work them into a section for whatever you've chosen. The websites for Empire magazine and The New York Times should be good for a lot of them, and I think Roger Ebert keeps an archive of reviews on his website too. GRAPPLE   X  17:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Richard III FA review
I agree with some of the reasons for delisting Richard III from feature-article status (notably the articles fragmented disconnected style), but not with the challenges to the sources (one in particular stands out like a sore thumb, the Criterion collection). Please address my objections at Talk:Richard III (1955_film). Regards,--WickerGuy (talk) 18:46, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * My concern was more with sources that were not used. The film article lacked a thoroughness in that regard. I listed references at the top of the article's talk page. I did not scrutinize the existing sources, but I thought that it needed more. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:24, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * On that point, I thoroughly concur. But it is not clear from the primary FA review document.--WickerGuy (talk) 23:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

New template
Hey Erik, I have created a new template , which will add a link to Hindi in infoxbox, and will also automatically add. Hows it? -- Karthik Nadar (talk) 09:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

How can I bring awareness to a talk page without looking like an attention whore?
Here for example I want someone to reply to the things I say. I'd love to use tags to bring awareness, but I'm worried that if I did that I'd look like an attention whore, and I don't want that. So what should I do when nobody replies to a message I post on a talk page? BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, since you're obviously too busy with real life, I will get help from someone else. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 17:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter 2
Hi Erik. I noticed today that my user talk page has been included in Category:WikiProject Film newsletters along with user talk pages of five other editors, including David Fuchs (see ) above. I assume it has something to do with the delivery method. What is odd is that we were all listed under the letter O. Matthewedwards : Chat  21:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it has to do with the full delivery method. It's probably "O" for October. I'll get this fixed. :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 21:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I usually just clicked on edit this page for the newsletter and copied everything above the category before pasting it onto the talk pages that wanted the full delivery. That seems to be the easiest workaround. Caused me a few problems in the past as well. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review Nudge
As you requested, I am "nudging" you to go on the peer revinew for Ra.One. Really, we need it soon. Please help us out.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 18:36, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to add American cinema task force under WikiProject United States
Greetings, I am a member of WikiProject United States, it was recently suggested that the American cinema task force of WikiProject Film which you are a member, might be inactive or semi active and it might be beneficial to include a joint task force for it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States, which Kumioko and me have added some of the projects like WikiProject American television and WikiProject United States Government. After reviewing the project it appears that there have not been any active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the task force talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  21:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Your eyes, please....
I'd like you to take a look at my new essay "On other evidence of film notability" before it goes live. Many thanks,  Schmidt, ' MICHAEL Q. 03:53, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * WP:Other evidence of film notability (shortcuts WP:OEN and WP:ATTRIBUTES) has gone live.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:09, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

X-Men in film
I think I am in on renaming the film series article into this. Also we might need a little extra help on determining whether X-Men: First Class is a sequel, reboot or both on the discussion page of the article if you are not too busy. :) Jhenderson  7 7 7  16:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Newsletter
Hey. Sorry to disturb you once more, but I would like to know whether the November 2011 newsletter for WP:Film is ready. In case it isn't, can you please tell me exactly when the newsletter of the month is delivered? Thanks.  Ankit Bhatt  WDF 14:10, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Film November 2011 Newsletter
The  2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:2007 Ten Commandments poster.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:2007 Ten Commandments poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Season's tidings!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:02, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

WikiProject Film December 2011 Newsletter
The December 2011 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —Peppage (talk &#124; contribs) 22:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I shouldn't have come back at all, that was a big mistake.
Obviously, I'm not here to help the website. So what's the point of being on this site at all? BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 13:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Blacked out?
Hello Erik, I have just recently found out that Wikipedia will be blacked out globally in the next 8 hours, for 24 hours. I have attempted many times to read the notice about this, but it is a little confusing for me. May I ask, if you, a long-term editor to Wikipedia, could explain this to me in your own words why this is happening? If you could do that, I would really appreciate it. Monkeys 9711 (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fight Club poster.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Fight Club poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)